"We've been losing. What I want is for us to finish dead last."

[Boss_Hogg]

He owns a valuable "centerpiece" franchise AND the stadium they play in - which at one time was the largest in the league. The stadium is the key here.

 

Wait until he builds "Snyder Land" in Loudon County, VA. 

 

The team's value will plummet. 

[markmills67]

We all new this season was going to be a struggle with possibly 6 wins maximum, now we have half the team either currently injured or on IR so maybe we won't even get to 6. But take Gronk, Eddelman , 3 starting OL and 3 starting DB'S and see how the Patriots do.

HTTR

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

Bout time for that Draft Position Tracker thread.

[The Dude]

I think the Patriots would do just fine. They played most of the 2013 season without Gronk, finished 12-4 and went to the AFC championship.

 

Their QB may be a hair better than ours.  Then again, they went 11-5 when Brady missed the 2008 season, so maybe he's a system QB.  

[zoony]

I heard recently that Tom Brady is the Yoda of QBing at this point. I think that's correct

We are a squad of battle droids

[skins4ever28]

I havent posted in forever, but I just have to say its good to see nothings changed on these boards. Most of the people here change their mind about the team each week.

REgardless we need to finish dead last, because its something we never get to do, we always have to be that team that goes 4-12, with the 3rd pick or something dumb.

Heres my two cents, I felt we were doomed from the start to be honest. I felt that way because Gruden isnt a good coach, and we dont have a good QB on the team.

We are going to have up and down weeks, because we are decent at best. But we arent going to lose more than 10-11 games.

You see, we need to have Scott bring in his own crew. Gruden was part of the Allen group, that was with the worst coach in NFL history, Jim Haslett. They arent good, wont be good, and probably have another 2-4 years before we even start competiting.

Why are teams like us, the browns, etc always like this? I truly dont know. I always felt if we just had a legit QB, we would be a contender for years to come. But with each passing year I am starting to wonder if we even ever will have a chance at success again. Some of you blame the owner, and although I understand where some of you are coming from, I really think Dan has been doing his best as of the past 5-6 years to let the football coaches/staff do what they can and get out of their way. But nothings helped...

 

My last hope is that we do finish dead last, get a QB and maybe reset this poor excuse of a coaching staff, especially the head coach(by the way, how great do the bengals offense look without Mr Gruden at the helm.  Hue Jackson made Jason C look amazing in the raiders offense a few years ago if anyone remembers).  Have Scott try to change our entire mindset around here, and then just maybe we have a shot at starting to become a team.

We obviously need to be careful picking a QB though, it really bit us in the bum last time...

 

Heck I dont know, Im just sad and typing, am I the only one that is starting to like hate Sundays?  I almost dread watching them anymore.  I have a tattoo on my arm of the Skins emblem, and Ill never be able to like another team... But I mean football happens once a year and I waste money on the sunday ticket, and put so much time into this team for what?  Someone talk me back from the cliff, lol.

[Morrison J]

We have McCloughan. Guy is going to deliver the goods come draft day irrespective of where we're picking. Close thread. 

[campbellcooleyconnection]

I feel your Sunday pain bro!Football isn't fun & exciting anymore ,more like watching a movie for the 100th time( u know how it ends) :/

[pjfootballer]

This whole idea of being "Dead Last" doesn't do you a damn bit of good if you don't have the supposed "Franchise QB" that everybody thinks is just sitting there.  Suck for ______? who exactly? 

 

Can anyone name one QB in college right now that is 100% a sure thing?  I can't name one QB that is 75% a sure thing.  In fact, with the current crop of QBs coming out, I'd rather we skip finding a QB in the first round and continue going BPA like we did this year.  It worked out well as we have a 10-15 year Grade A starter at RG.

 

Scot has proven he can make the right picks, whether it's at 5, 34, 71 or 96.  Continue to try and win ballgames and worry about draft picks in April.  Let the man hired to do the evaluating and picking and do his job.

 

We picked #2 overall four years ago with a supposed "sure thing" and that didn't turn out so well.

 

What is with fans infatuation with getting the #1 overall pick?  The right player has to be there or you have to have the right guy picking.  You think the Raiders wouldn't love to have that #1 overall pick back from the Jamarcus Russell pick? 

 

No thanks.  Let the cards fall and hand it over to Scot.

[skins4ever28]

Not so much the #1 pick, but just continue with top 3-5 picks.  Not the 10th-11th pick.

Secondly, I dont care if we draft 4 Jamarcus Russels and 1 Aaron Rodgers.  It would be worth it just to get that 1 aaron Rodgers IMO.

[zoony]

Not so much the #1 pick, but just continue with top 3-5 picks. Not the 10th-11th pick.

Secondly, I dont care if we draft 4 Jamarcus Russels and 1 Aaron Rodgers. It would be worth it just to get that 1 aaron Rodgers IMO.

Yah it's the top of every round that makes the big difference imo

For the record, I want us to get the 1 overall and trade it for a lot of picks over two drafts. Not necessary use it on one guy

But teams seem to be less willing to trade. And at this point, a monster WR might be a better pick at 1 overall than the best QB prospect

[illone]

This whole idea of being "Dead Last" doesn't do you a damn bit of good if you don't have the supposed "Franchise QB" that everybody thinks is just sitting there.  Suck for ______? who exactly? 

 

 

You are right.  The draft is a crap shoot and you have no way of knowing who/what will be there.

 

If it was 2004 you could have had your pick between Eli, Rivers, or Big Ben and been right on any of them.

 

In 2005 Jason Candle was picked one slot after Aaron Rodgers (24th overall) and Alex Smith went 1st overall.

 

I think the whole idea behind suck for (insert top prospect) is because the Skins always seem to be so close yet so far from getting the right guy under center.  In other words, if we had just lost a few more games in 2011 then we would not have given up a kings ransom to get Rg3.   I think the right number is 2-3 losses.  Does anyone have any fond memories of winning 5 games in 2011?  2 wins or 5 wins makes little difference.  I'm not saying we should do that, but certainly gives the team more options if they pick higher.  And with Scot at the helm this front office is not scared to reach for the right guy (See Scherff 2015 draft). 

 

For me it's just a fun way to make the season actually mean something.  Losing sucks, but if there is at least some prize at the end then it can be meaningful.

 

My real belief on this topic is that there is a much deeper issue at stake here than just picking the right guy, or hitting the lottery in the draft.  It's much more a function of the system that the organization runs.  I.E. offensive philosophy, character, etc.  I always go back to the Steelers, Ravens, and Patriots as the best examples of this.  They bring coaches, players, and front office personnel into an existing way of doing business.  Like company culture.  It's the Steelers Way, the Patriots Way, the Ravens Way.  There is no such thing as Redskins Way. What is Redskins football? There is no identity, and no company culture.  Redskins change philosophies every 2-3 years, churn and burn. 

 

Until that is fixed it will not matter who the Skins draft, or who the head coach is.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Yah it's the top of every round that makes the big difference imo

For the record, I want us to get the 1 overall and trade it for a lot of picks over two drafts. Not necessary use it on one guy

But teams seem to be less willing to trade. And at this point, a monster WR might be a better pick at 1 overall than the best QB prospect

 

I think the problem with 2016 is that no QB is probably worthy of the top 10. If you want to draft a QB, sitting at 12 may be better.

 

I think it's going to be a boring draft. All the top picks seem to be interchangeable offensive and defensive linemen.

 

Anyway, the issue I always run into with tanking in the NFL is I think you actually have to win to get better. You can tank as an NBA team, because you could literally cut the entire team in one off-season if you really wanted to. In football, the guys who got the **** kicked out of them in the Suck for Whoever campaign are going to be around for a while - punch drunk and toothless.

[zoony]

I think the problem with 2016 is that no QB is probably worthy of the top 10. If you want to draft a QB, sitting at 12 may be better.

 

I think it's going to be a boring draft. All the top picks seem to be interchangeable offensive and defensive linemen.

 

Anyway, the issue I always run into with tanking in the NFL is I think you actually have to win to get better. You can tank as an NBA team, because you could literally cut the entire team in one off-season if you really wanted to. In football, the guys who got the **** kicked out of them in the Suck for Whoever campaign are going to be around for a while - punch drunk and toothless.

 

 

Which again is why I've never understood any team, in the history of football, targeting a rebuild date.  With the future value of draft picks it makes all the sense in the world.

 

Make 2018 your target rebuild date.  Gear every single thing towards 2018 that you can.

 

Is DeSean Jackson currently worth a 3rd round pick?  Then I guess he'd be worth a 1st round pick in 2018, right?

Your #1 draft pick is worth a first and a 3rd in 2016?  Surely it would then be worth a 1st, 2nd, 3rd in 2018, right?

 

Keep trading everything you can in 2018.  In the 2018 draft, build your entire team from a collection of draft choices.  Make that the first year of your rebuild.  Add pieces from there.

 

Just surprised it's never even been talked about.

 

 

Now nevermind all that - to your point about punch drunk, It can be true to a certain extent, but losing by 3 points or winning by 3 points doesn't make any difference other than your draft position.

[RedskinsLegacy]

We all new this season was going to be a struggle with possibly 6 wins maximum, now we have half the team either currently injured or on IR so maybe we won't even get to 6. But take Gronk, Eddelman , 3 starting OL and 3 starting DB'S and see how the Patriots do.

HTTR

Exactly! We just about fielded a preseason team and some fans can't understand why we would lose.

[Darrel2828]

I feel like this thread is used every year at about this time.

Problem is it never fixes anything.

[pjfootballer]

You are right.  The draft is a crap shoot and you have no way of knowing who/what will be there.

 

If it was 2004 you could have had your pick between Eli, Rivers, or Big Ben and been right on any of them.

 

In 2005 Jason Candle was picked one slot after Aaron Rodgers (24th overall) and Alex Smith went 1st overall.

 

I think the whole idea behind suck for (insert top prospect) is because the Skins always seem to be so close yet so far from getting the right guy under center.  In other words, if we had just lost a few more games in 2011 then we would not have given up a kings ransom to get Rg3.   I think the right number is 2-3 losses.  Does anyone have any fond memories of winning 5 games in 2011?  2 wins or 5 wins makes little difference.  I'm not saying we should do that, but certainly gives the team more options if they pick higher.  And with Scot at the helm this front office is not scared to reach for the right guy (See Scherff 2015 draft). 

 

For me it's just a fun way to make the season actually mean something.  Losing sucks, but if there is at least some prize at the end then it can be meaningful.

 

My real belief on this topic is that there is a much deeper issue at stake here than just picking the right guy, or hitting the lottery in the draft.  It's much more a function of the system that the organization runs.  I.E. offensive philosophy, character, etc.  I always go back to the Steelers, Ravens, and Patriots as the best examples of this.  They bring coaches, players, and front office personnel into an existing way of doing business.  Like company culture.  It's the Steelers Way, the Patriots Way, the Ravens Way.  There is no such thing as Redskins Way. What is Redskins football? There is no identity, and no company culture.  Redskins change philosophies every 2-3 years, churn and burn. 

 

Until that is fixed it will not matter who the Skins draft, or who the head coach is.

 

I understand that the highest talent is in the top 10.  I can see why some feel the need to lose to get the highest pick possible. I just feel comfortable with Scot picking, no matter where we are in the draft. He must be doing something right.  The Colts took an injured player off waivers that we picked in the 6th round. When has anyone tried to "steal" our 6th round pick let alone any pick.

 

Of the 3 franchises you listed, I'd say the Steelers are the only one of the three that have had a tried and true team philosophy that they've sustained over a long period of time. Everyone forgets that before 1970, from 1932 to 1969, the Steelers franchise was garbage.  The Patriots were not a franchise you wanted to follow from their inception in 1960 until Billy arrived in the late 90s.  Technically the Ravens have only started doing what they are doing since the mid 90s.  When they were the Browns you can say they had some successes in the 60s, not in the 70s, some in the 80s and none in the 90s.

 

I think it's cyclical.  We were a great franchise from 1932 until 1952. Baugh retired and the team sucked from 1952 to 1969 until Lombardi showed up.  We had some mild success in the 70s and had our real success from 1981 to 1993.  Now, we suck again. I'm hoping now that Scot has control, he is instilling his philosophy of building a franchise and that it sticks.

[Koolblue13]

Yah it's the top of every round that makes the big difference imo

For the record, I want us to get the 1 overall and trade it for a lot of picks over two drafts. Not necessary use it on one guy

But teams seem to be less willing to trade. And at this point, a monster WR might be a better pick at 1 overall than the best QB prospect

That's exactly where I'm at. That Marshall TD, showed what a monster WR can do.

 

This draft should have some great talent up front with CBs too. If we had 2 guys playing like Bash, it would be great.

ILB is another position of need.

 

We have tons of holes and a glaring lack of talent. That's our main problem. 

 

Can't waste 3 firsts and a high second, then fail with almost every other pick, over the course of 3 years and pretend some great FA additions will solve that. If anyone knows this to be true, it's the redskin fan.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Which again is why I've never understood any team, in the history of football, targeting a rebuild date.  With the future value of draft picks it makes all the sense in the world.

 

Make 2018 your target rebuild date.  Gear every single thing towards 2018 that you can.

 

Is DeSean Jackson currently worth a 3rd round pick?  Then I guess he'd be worth a 1st round pick in 2018, right?

Your #1 draft pick is worth a first and a 3rd in 2016?  Surely it would then be worth a 1st, 2nd, 3rd in 2018, right?

 

Keep trading everything you can in 2018.  In the 2018 draft, build your entire team from a collection of draft choices.  Make that the first year of your rebuild.  Add pieces from there.

 

Just surprised it's never even been talked about.

 

 

Now nevermind all that - to your point about punch drunk, It can be true to a certain extent, but losing by 3 points or winning by 3 points doesn't make any difference other than your draft position.

 

I've thought about this over the past couple years...it's a fascinating strategy to me and I think that it could work. Like you demonstrate, future value would help you bring back so much for any asset that you have now.

 

My guess is that, as an organization, you'd have to confess to fans and the current players that management is essentially working AGAINST the coaching staff on fielding a competitive team. Again, for the greater good it would likely be worth it, but it could be a very tough PR sell. It could also alienate fans as 2-3 years of essentially no NFL team would feel like an eternity. 

 

Then again, the counter-argument for a team like the Redskins is that we finish in last whether we try or not, so who cares if we tack on a few more 4th place finishes with a real shot to rebuild the team in a couple years.